CAll Robert White in Poole and ask who they use. IF that fails, write me off-list and I’ll give you another name.
On Mar 31, 2014, at 3:38 PM, Jonathan Turner wrote:
Hey thanks everyone for all your comments - some useful suggestions.
I kind of thought much the same with regard to going with the longer
exposure, rather than the shorter, but hadn't thought of adjusting
the aperture (made slightly complicated that I'm shooting with flash
too and exposing for that...guess I can just alter the power coming
out of the flash head).
On the whole though, I'm not entirely sure I trust this lens...I've
done a couple of test shots with it and the first batch of negs look
a little thin...just shot a couple more today so will see how they
come back. Jan, I would send it off to your man in Chicago but I'm
actually based in Leeds, England, so that may be a little far... I
guess I can find someone round here to look at it, but I'm thinking,
just to be on the safe side, I might just get another lens...kind of
fancy something just a little wider than standard anyway. The rest
of the camera seems fairly tight and clean, and I've shot some
Polaroids through it too and there don't seem to be any light
leakages.
Interesting to refer back to the thread about whether digital is
really enjoyable or not...I guess I love the safety of shooting
digital, as well as the process (yes, there is still process in
digital I think) but somehow using this old beast of a 5x4...looking
at an image upside down and back to front, through a ground glass
screen just feels a little more exciting than looking through my
DSLR somehow... Maybe that's because I know that unless I'm really
concentrating on each step of what I'm doing, I will mess it up
somehow, and there will be no chance to rectify it in photoshop's
RAW window!
Thanks again, will let yo know how I get on.
Cheers,
Jonathan.
--
Jonathan Turner, Photographer e: pictures@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx t:
07796 470573 w: www.jonathan-turner.com
On 31/03/2014 18:39, Jan Faul wrote:
On Mar 31, 2014, at 12:03 PM, Stephen Ylvisaker wrote:
A local
camera repair technician, if there are any around
still, would be able to clean, lube and test the lens
accuracy. That is if you intend to be serious about
large format shooting. If this is just exerimentation
to get exposed to large format photography, do some
tests on your own, doing as Randy suggested.
Before
taking the lens to the technician, do a couple test
shots to make sure you don't have light leaks, or to
find and "fix" the light leaks.
Stephen
Set aperture to f8.3 or whatever
fraction the shutter speed is off by. But you
are going to need to test to even know what
the shutter is actually producing speed wise.
Its probably not very accurate any more.
On Mar
31, 2014 4:32 AM, "Jonathan Turner" < pictures@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Hi,
I recently bought an old large format
field camera that came with a lens which
is so old it has shutter speeds that don't
correspond with my light meter; it has
5th, 10th, 25th, 50th, 100th, 200th,
instead of the normal shutter speeds (8th,
15th, 30th, 60th etc.)
So my problem is trying to work out what
the correct exposure should be...working
from my meter. I'm shooting colour
negative, so I'm guessing it can take a
bit of latitude either way, but can't
quite work out if I should go with an
exposure that is slightly over, or
slightly under what the meter says. For
example, if my meter reading is F8/125th,
should I shoot at F8/100th, or F8/200th?
Any input appreciated.
Cheers,
Jonathan.
--
Jonathan Turner, Photographer e: pictures@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
t: 07796 470573 w: http://www.jonathan-turner.com/
Art Faul
The
Artist Formerly Known as Prints
------
Camera
Works - The Washington Post
.
Art Faul
The Artist Formerly Known as Prints ------ Camera Works - The Washington Post
.
|
